Kocher Case `Remarkable,' State Justices Told

January 18, 1991|by DEBBIE GARLICKI, The Morning Call

State Supreme Court justices yesterday were asked to answer the unsettling question of what the justice system should do with 11-year-old Cameron Kocher, who was 9 when he looked through the scope of his father's rifle and pulled the trigger, killing a 7-year-old girl.

"This case is indeed a remarkable case," said James Crawford, a seasoned appellate lawyer from Philadelphia who was retained by the Kocher family's lawyer to argue the boy's legal fate.

"This involves the prosecution of the youngest person ever prosecuted for murder in the United States in the 20th century," Crawford told the seven justices in an effort to convince them that Cameron's homicide case should be handled by juvenile authorities.

Crawford asked the high court to overturn a Monroe County judge's ruling that the boy stand trial in criminal court and appealed to the justices to remand the case for an appropriate resolution in juvenile court.

As Crawford and special prosecutor Mark Pazuhanich argued their sides before the court in City Hall, the justices interrupted the arguments with many questions and comments. Cameron's parents, Keith and Patricia Kocher, and Charles Hansford, the Palmerton defense lawyer who is handling all other aspects of the case, sat in the courtroom.

Pazuhanich argued that state law mandates that homicide cases be tried in criminal court and gives no minimum age at which a person can't be charged with murder.

Crawford told the justices, "This case is one of those cases in which you will probably have to create precedent."

The law allows a judge to transfer a case to juvenile court if the defense shows a child under 18 is amenable to and in need of treatment, supervision and rehabilitation. Last year, Monroe County Judge Ronald Vican ruled that Cameron be tried in criminal court, saying the "apparent deliberate and willful nature" of the shooting and the boy's "mature thought processes and adultlike reaction to the shooting" were factors in his decision.

Prosecutors said Cameron shot Jessica Ann Carr on March 6, 1989, as she was riding a snowmobile in a yard next to the Kocher home in Kresgeville.

Prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty, and lawyers in the case agree it's highly unlikely the boy would be sent to a state prison with adult criminals. But whether the boy is tried in criminal or juvenile court will determine how long authorities can supervise him, according to District Attorney E. David Christine Jr.

If treated as a juvenile, Cameron can be supervised by authorities only until he is 21 years old.

His highly publicized case has gained national attention. The American Bar Association and the state Juvenile Law Center filed briefs with the Supreme Court supporting Hansford.

Pazuhanich said the issue before the court isn't the sentence Cameron will get, and he added that that would be determined at a different stage. If the boy is convicted of first-degree murder, the court may later find that life imprisonment, the sentence given to adult murderers, is not appropriate for Cameron, he said.

"This is rather shocking, counselor," Justice John P. Flaherty said.

Earlier, Flaherty remarked to Pazuhanich, "I was waiting to hear how anybody could do the thing that you've done."

Prosecutors appear the villains in this case, Pazuhanich said. He told the court that the decision to try the boy in criminal court wasn't taken lightly and was based on his reading of the law and the facts in the case.

Pazuhanich said that at previous Monroe County Court hearings, psychiatrists testified that Cameron is capable of intentional conduct and can form an intent to kill.

Chief Justice Robert N.C. Nix Jr. said children go through steps in maturing. Even if a youngster could have an intent to kill, Nix said, "the question is, Does that youngster have the maturity to understand what death means?"

In his brief, Hansford argued that a 9-year-old boy isn't capable of showing malice -- the hardness of heart and cruelty necessary for murder. "However `mean' and `cruel' children's behavior might seem from squabbles in the sandbox to playground put-downs to tragic shootings of playmates, children are simply incapable developmentally of harboring malice under the centuries-old legal meaning of that term," Hansford wrote.

He also contended that a 9-year-old's perception of death is often unrealistic and that children sometimes don't understand that death is final.

Justice Rolf Larsen recited some of the facts in the case and questioned Pazuhanich, asking him whether one could infer from them that Cameron acted intentionally, even without the testimony of experts that he could form the intent to kill.

According to testimony from previous hearings, Cameron, angry about a Nintendo game, unlocked his father's gun cabinet, got a rifle and loaded it. He aimed it out a window of his house at the girl and fired. Cameron put the gun back and locked the cabinet.